Where should I begin? Too many English Bibles are influenced by either American fundamentalist or modernist secular scholarship.

Well any example would be fine. Let me give you an example of what I'm expecting to get. In 2 Thes. 3:15, we find in the KJV the word "traditions," or paradosis in Greek. In every other place in the New Testament where paradosis is used (almost all of them in a negative context) the KJV translators use the word "traditions". Every other place, that is, except one: 1 Cor. 11:2, where paradosis is given as "ordinances".ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š At first, this might seem like a Protestant bias to keep the Bible from saying too often "keep the traditions [ordinances] as I delivered them to you". But this is not necessarily so. It is very possible that it was simply a mistake. There were a great number of translators, after all, and the KJV was originally released with literally hundreds of errors, so it's not like it had nearly-perfect editing! What might at first seem to be bias might just have been poor scholarship; or maybe a different author just chose a different word. Who knows?ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Anyway, that is sort of what I was expecting when you talked about biases, only I was interested in seeing some which were perhaps more likely cases of error caused by bias. I have a few others in mind, but I'm curious as to which ones you would throw out.

Well that's an interesting case (which I think points to a larger problem--the use of the Hebrew rather than the Greek Old Testament), but I can't tell you how Orthodox translations in English translates that because I don't have any of the Old Testament (except the Psalms). I only have two Orthodox Scriptures of the New Testament, the Orthodox Study Bible, which is based on the NKJV (which is fine with me), and the Orthodox New Testament by Holy Apostles Convent.

I'd say the more likely reason than what Keble's suggests is that the Orthodox simply haven't set it as a priority. It has really only been no more than 50 years that Orthodox in America have taken to use English amd there are plenty of Biblical translations that are at least acceptable for personal use already in English (although the most important piece that is quite different from existing translations, the Psalter, was translated long ago from the Septuagint). Besides that there is so much that has nothing in English that must be translated first:

12 volumes of Menaia

12 Volumes of the Synaxaria

8 Volumes of the Oktoechos

5 volumes of the Philokalia

important patristic and other writtings of the various Churches from last 1000 years - tons of material here

and some pre-schism fathers that are appearing for the first time in English

I can think of two reasons. First, it doesn't matter. I mean, were you any less able to work out your salvation with fear and trembling last week, when you were unaware of this lack of a full Orthodox Bible in English? Point being, on the grass roots level this has absolutely, positively no significance whatsoever. Even if there was an Orthodox Bible in English, that doesn't mean every parish would run right out and buy one, and 99% of the people in the pews wouldn't notice the difference anyway. And the second reason I can think of (and the reason I haven't responded until now) is that it is--not on the popular level, but on the level of academia and the intelligensia--a scandal, and makes us look very lazy.

Thomas,

I thought it was as well, but when I went to the OSB site, it said that "we feel confident that the new Orthodox Study Bible will be available for purchase in time for Pascha, 2007." ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š

My understanding is that the Orthodox Study Bible OT will essentially be the NKJV, with a few changes made here and there accounting for significant differences between the MT and LXX. Unfortunately we do not have enough english-speaking Orthodox Biblical Scholars to undertake a proper translation project to provide a scholarly and critical text and translation; for while I believe our OT professor at Holy Cross, Fr. Pentiuc, would be capable of undertaking such a scholarly endeavour, he is the only Orthodox Biblical Scholar I'm familiar with who seems to be (though admitedly, I am not familiar with all the scholarly publications of all the Biblical Studies Professors at the Metropolia's Schools). Unfortunately, Orthodox Scholars, in general (at least in America), tend to be of a lower caliber than their Protestant or Roman Catholic Counterparts, with a few notable exceptions.

Of course, one should note that the professor whom GiC mentioned (Fr. Pentiuc) can be a bit controversial (and flamboyant), and he has also almost sworn off the project altogether because his work on the OT (I think he edited Hosea and another book, maybe?) was changed by the editors, for what he called "political reasons." He was insulted that people who were not biblical scholars were going to change his text and commentaries... Of course, he is quite opinionated, and at times overly biased.

I mean, were you any less able to work out your salvation with fear and trembling last week, when you were unaware of this lack of a full Orthodox Bible in English?

This is something I've been aware of since I first converted to Orthodoxy a few years ago. One reason why this is important is the modernist commentaries in non-Orthodox Bibles. I don't want to see, for example, a 'scholar' opine on how no Apostle was involved in the composition of John's Gospel. While it may not change my beliefs, it may influence others who are more vulnerable.

Of course, one should note that the professor whom GiC mentioned (Fr. Pentiuc) can be a bit controversial (and flamboyant), and he has also almost sworn off the project altogether because his work on the OT (I think he edited Hosea and another book, maybe?) was changed by the editors, for what he called "political reasons."ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š He was insulted that people who were not biblical scholars were going to change his text and commentaries... Of course, he is quite opinionated, and at times overly biased.

Yes, Fr. Pentiuc can also be somewhat controversial at times, but as an Orthodox Old Testament Scholar he is probably one of the most qualified in the English-speaking world, and one of the most competent (if not the most competent, though dont tell him I said that) professors we have at Holy Cross...the opinionatedness and bias he sometimes shows generally comes from the fact that's he's aware of this...lol. He is justified to be offended when non-biblical scholars alter his research after requesting his participation, and from what I understand the changes were made without adequate scholarship to support them, especially when a book he is as competent in as Hosea is concerned.

We barely fund our churches and mission work... it's been a chore to fund just revising the NKJV... right now, the people aren't putting forward the resources to pay the people to go over and do the work. I think that's the biggest hurdle to the whole project.

well, the Orthodox study bible is my favorite translation for the fact that it is (to the best of my knowledge) free of any Protestant or Catholic influence. my priest had me bring my bible to catechism class snd told me that the Orthodox study bible includes an extra psalm, the song of the three youths, and other such things that didn't quite make it into the other bibles. it also has wonderful two-sided, full-color pictures of icons in different places. it also explains the Orthodox church and some of it's teachings on some information pages.